34 research outputs found
Exploring the ability of the variable-resolution Community Earth System Model to simulate cryosphericâhydrological variables in High Mountain Asia
Earth system models (ESMs) can help to improve the understanding of climate-induced cryosphericâhydrological impacts in complex mountain regions, such as High Mountain Asia (HMA). Coarse ESM grids, however, have difficulties in representing cryosphericâhydrological processes that vary over short distances in complex mountainous environments. Variable-resolution (VR) ESMs can help to overcome these limitations through targeted grid refinement. This study investigates the ability of the VR Community Earth System Model (VR-CESM) to simulate cryosphericâhydrological variables such as the glacier surface mass balance (SMB) over HMA. To this end, a new VR grid is generated, with a regional grid refinement up to 7âkm over HMA. Two coupled atmosphereâland simulations are run for the period 1979â1998. The second simulation is performed with an updated glacier cover dataset and includes snow and glacier model modifications. Comparisons are made to gridded outputs derived from a globally uniform 1â CESM grid, observation-, reanalysis-, and satellite-based datasets, and a glacier model forced by a regional climate model (RCM). Climatological biases are generally reduced compared to the coarse-resolution CESM grid, but the glacier SMB is too negative relative to observation-based glaciological and geodetic mass balances, as well as the RCM-forced glacier model output. In the second simulation, the SMB is improved but is still underestimated due to cloud cover and temperature biases, missing model physics, and incomplete landâatmosphere coupling. The outcomes suggest that VR-CESM could be a useful tool to simulate cryosphericâhydrological variables and to study climate change in mountainous environments, but further developments are needed to better simulate the SMB of mountain glaciers
Recommended from our members
initMIP-Antarctica: an ice sheet model initialization experiment of ISMIP6
Ice sheet numerical modeling is an important tool to estimate the dynamic contribution of the Antarctic ice sheet to sea level rise over the coming centuries. The influence of initial conditions on ice sheet model simulations, however, is still unclear. To better understand this influence, an initial state intercomparison exercise (initMIP) has been developed to compare, evaluate, and improve initialization procedures and estimate their impact on century-scale simulations. initMIP is the first set of experiments of the Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6 (ISMIP6), which is the primary Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) activity focusing on the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets. Following initMIP-Greenland, initMIP-Antarctica has been designed to explore uncertainties associated with model initialization and spin-up and to evaluate the impact of changes in external forcings. Starting from the state of the Antarctic ice sheet at the end of the initialization procedure, three forward experiments are each run for 100 years: a control run, a run with a surface mass balance anomaly, and a run with a basal melting anomaly beneath floating ice. This study presents the results of initMIP-Antarctica from 25 simulations performed by 16 international modeling groups. The submitted results use different initial conditions and initialization methods, as well as ice flow model parameters and reference external forcings. We find a good agreement among model responses to the surface mass balance anomaly but large variations in responses to the basal melting anomaly. These variations can be attributed to differences in the extent of ice shelves and their upstream tributaries, the numerical treatment of grounding line, and the initial ocean conditions applied, suggesting that ongoing efforts to better represent ice shelves in continental-scale models should continue
Recommended from our members
The future sea-level contribution of the Greenland ice sheet: A multi-model ensemble study of ISMIP6
The Greenland ice sheet is one of the largest contributors to global mean sea-level rise today and is expected to continue to lose mass as the Arctic continues to warm. The two predominant mass loss mechanisms are increased surface meltwater run-off and mass loss associated with the retreat of marine-terminating outlet glaciers. In this paper we use a large ensemble of Greenland ice sheet models forced by output from a representative subset of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) global climate models to project ice sheet changes and sea-level rise contributions over the 21st century. The simulations are part of the Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6 (ISMIP6).We estimate the sea-level contribution together with uncertainties due to future climate forcing, ice sheet model formulations and ocean forcing for the two greenhouse gas concentration scenarios RCP8.5 and RCP2.6. The results indicate that the Greenland ice sheet will continue to lose mass in both scenarios until 2100, with contributions of 90-50 and 32-17mm to sea-level rise for RCP8.5 and RCP2.6, respectively. The largest mass loss is expected from the south-west of Greenland, which is governed by surface mass balance changes, continuing what is already observed today. Because the contributions are calculated against an unforced control experiment, these numbers do not include any committed mass loss, i.e. mass loss that would occur over the coming century if the climate forcing remained constant. Under RCP8.5 forcing, ice sheet model uncertainty explains an ensemble spread of 40 mm, while climate model uncertainty and ocean forcing uncertainty account for a spread of 36 and 19 mm, respectively. Apart from those formally derived uncertainty ranges, the largest gap in our knowledge is about the physical understanding and implementation of the calving process, i.e. the interaction of the ice sheet with the ocean. © Author(s) 2020
The future sea-level contribution of the Greenland ice sheet: a multi-model ensemble study of ISMIP6
The Greenland ice sheet is one of the largest contributors to global mean sea-level rise today and is expected to continue to lose mass as the Arctic continues to warm. The two predominant mass loss mechanisms are increased surface meltwater run-off and mass loss associated with the retreat of marine-terminating outlet glaciers. In this paper we use a large ensemble of Greenland ice sheet models forced by output from a representative subset of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) global climate models to project ice sheet changes and sea-level rise contributions over the 21st century. The simulations are part of the Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). We estimate the sea-level contribution together with uncertainties due to future climate forcing, ice sheet model formulations and ocean forcing for the two greenhouse gas concentration scenarios RCP8.5 and RCP2.6. The results indicate that the Greenland ice sheet will continue to lose mass in both scenarios until 2100, with contributions of 90±50 and 32±17âmm to sea-level rise for RCP8.5 and RCP2.6, respectively. The largest mass loss is expected from the south-west of Greenland, which is governed by surface mass balance changes, continuing what is already observed today. Because the contributions are calculated against an unforced control experiment, these numbers do not include any committed mass loss, i.e. mass loss that would occur over the coming century if the climate forcing remained constant. Under RCP8.5 forcing, ice sheet model uncertainty explains an ensemble spread of 40âmm, while climate model uncertainty and ocean forcing uncertainty account for a spread of 36 and 19âmm, respectively. Apart from those formally derived uncertainty ranges, the largest gap in our knowledge is about the physical understanding and implementation of the calving process, i.e. the interaction of the ice sheet with the ocean
Recommended from our members
Future Sea Level Change Under Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 and Phase 6 Scenarios From the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets
Projections of the sea level contribution from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets (GrIS and AIS) rely on atmospheric and oceanic drivers obtained from climate models. The Earth System Models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) generally project greater future warming compared with the previous Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5) effort. Here we use four CMIP6 models and a selection of CMIP5 models to force multiple ice sheet models as part of the Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). We find that the projected sea level contribution at 2100 from the ice sheet model ensemble under the CMIP6 scenarios falls within the CMIP5 range for the Antarctic ice sheet but is significantly increased for Greenland. Warmer atmosphere in CMIP6 models results in higher Greenland mass loss due to surface melt. For Antarctica, CMIP6 forcing is similar to CMIP5 and mass gain from increased snowfall counteracts increased loss due to ocean warming
Recommended from our members
Insights on the vulnerability of Antarctic glaciers from the ISMIP6 ice sheet model ensemble and associated uncertainty
The Antarctic Ice Sheet represents the largest source of uncertainty in future sea level rise projections, with a contribution to sea level by 2100 ranging from â5 to 43âcm of sea level equivalent under high carbon emission scenarios estimated by the recent Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). ISMIP6 highlighted the different behaviors of the East and West Antarctic ice sheets, as well as the possible role of increased surface mass balance in offsetting the dynamic ice loss in response to changing oceanic conditions in ice shelf cavities. However, the detailed contribution of individual glaciers, as well as the partitioning of uncertainty associated with this ensemble, have not yet been investigated. Here, we analyze the ISMIP6 results for high carbon emission scenarios, focusing on key glaciers around the Antarctic Ice Sheet, and we quantify their projected dynamic mass loss, defined here as mass loss through increased ice discharge into the ocean in response to changing oceanic conditions. We highlight glaciers contributing the most to sea level rise, as well as their vulnerability to changes in oceanic conditions. We then investigate the different sources of uncertainty and their relative role in projections, for the entire continent and for key individual glaciers. We show that, in addition to Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers in West Antarctica, Totten and Moscow University glaciers in East Antarctica present comparable future dynamic mass loss and high sensitivity to ice shelf basal melt. The overall uncertainty in additional dynamic mass loss in response to changing oceanic conditions, compared to a scenario with constant oceanic conditions, is dominated by the choice of ice sheet model, accounting for 52â% of the total uncertainty of the Antarctic dynamic mass loss in 2100. Its relative role for the most dynamic glaciers varies between 14â% for MacAyeal and Whillans ice streams and 56â% for Pine Island Glacier at the end of the century. The uncertainty associated with the choice of climate model increases over time and reaches 13â% of the uncertainty by 2100 for the Antarctic Ice Sheet but varies between 4â% for Thwaites Glacier and 53â% for Whillans Ice Stream. The uncertainty associated with the iceâclimate interaction, which captures different treatments of oceanic forcings such as the choice of melt parameterization, its calibration, and simulated ice shelf geometries, accounts for 22â% of the uncertainty at the ice sheet scale but reaches 36â% and 39â% for Institute Ice Stream and Thwaites Glacier, respectively, by 2100. Overall, this study helps inform future research by highlighting the sectors of the ice sheet most vulnerable to oceanic warming over the 21st century and by quantifying the main sources of uncertainty
Insights into the vulnerability of Antarctic glaciers from the ISMIP6 ice sheet model ensemble and associated uncertainty
The Antarctic Ice Sheet represents the largest source of uncertainty in future sea level rise projections, with a contribution to sea level by 2100 ranging from â5 to 43 cm of sea level equivalent under high carbon emission scenarios estimated by the recent Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). ISMIP6 highlighted the different behaviors of the East and West Antarctic ice sheets, as well as the possible role of increased surface mass balance in offsetting the dynamic ice loss in response to changing oceanic conditions in ice shelf cavities. However, the detailed contribution of individual glaciers, as well as the partitioning of uncertainty associated with this ensemble, have not yet been investigated. Here, we analyze the ISMIP6 results for high carbon emission scenarios, focusing on key glaciers around the Antarctic Ice Sheet, and we quantify their projected dynamic mass loss, defined here as mass loss through increased ice discharge into the ocean in response to changing oceanic conditions. We highlight glaciers contributing the most to sea level rise, as well as their vulnerability to changes in oceanic conditions. We then investigate the different sources of uncertainty and their relative role in projections, for the entire continent and for key individual glaciers. We show that, in addition to Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers in West Antarctica, Totten and Moscow University glaciers in East Antarctica present comparable future dynamic mass loss and high sensitivity to ice shelf basal melt. The overall uncertainty in additional dynamic mass loss in response to changing oceanic conditions, compared to a scenario with constant oceanic conditions, is dominated by the choice of ice sheet model, accounting for 52 % of the total uncertainty of the Antarctic dynamic mass loss in 2100. Its relative role for the most dynamic glaciers varies between 14 % for MacAyeal and Whillans ice streams and 56 % for Pine Island Glacier at the end of the century. The uncertainty associated with the choice of climate model increases over time and reaches 13 % of the uncertainty by 2100 for the Antarctic Ice Sheet but varies between 4 % for Thwaites Glacier and 53 % for Whillans Ice Stream. The uncertainty associated with the iceâclimate interaction, which captures different treatments of oceanic forcings such as the choice of melt parameterization, its calibration, and simulated ice shelf geometries, accounts for 22 % of the uncertainty at the ice sheet scale but reaches 36 % and 39 % for Institute Ice Stream and Thwaites Glacier, respectively, by 2100. Overall, this study helps inform future research by highlighting the sectors of the ice sheet most vulnerable to oceanic warming over the 21st century and by quantifying the main sources of uncertainty
Data from: High-latitude stratospheric aerosol injection to preserve the Arctic
This data supports the results of "High-latitude stratospheric aerosol injection to preserve the Arctic" (Lee et. al., 2022), which reported: Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) has been shown in climate models to reduce some impacts of global warming in the Arctic, including the loss of sea ice, permafrost thaw, and reduction of Greenland Ice Sheet (GrIS) mass; SAI at high latitudes could preferentially target these impacts. In this study, we use the Community Earth System Model to simulate two Arctic-focused SAI strategies, which inject at 60°N latitude each spring with injection rates adjusted to either maintain September Arctic sea ice at 2030 levels (âArctic Lowâ) or restore it to 2010 levels (âArctic Highâ). Both simulations maintain or restore September Arctic sea ice to within 10% of their respective targets, reduce permafrost thaw, and increase GrIS surface mass balance by reducing runoff. Arctic High reduces these impacts more effectively than a globally-focused SAI strategy that injects similar quantities of SO2 at lower latitudes. However, Arctic-focused SAI is not merely a âreset buttonâ for the Arctic climate, but brings about a novel climate state, including changes to the seasonal cycles of Northern Hemisphere temperature and sea ice and less high-latitude carbon uptake relative to SSP2-4.5. Additionally, while Arctic-focused SAI predominantly cools the Arctic, its effects are not confined to the Arctic, including detectable cooling throughout most of the northern hemisphere for both simulations, increased mid-latitude sulfur deposition, and a southward shift of the location of the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ).National Science Foundation, CBET-1818759 and CBET-193164
A Comparison of the CMIP6 midHolocene
AbstractResults are presented and compared for the Community Earth System Model version 2 (CESM2) simulations of the middle Holocene (MH, 6 ka) and Last Interglacial (LIG, 127 ka). These simulations are designated as Tier 1 experiments (midHolocene and lig127k) for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) and the Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project phase 4 (PMIP4). They use the lowâtop, standard 1° version of CESM2 contributing to CMIP6 DECK, historical, and future projection simulations, and to other modeling intercomparison projects. The midHolocene and lig127k provide the opportunity to examine the responses in CESM2 to the orbitally induced changes in the seasonal and latitudinal distribution of insolation. The insolation anomalies result in summer warming over the Northern Hemisphere continents, reduced Arctic summer minimum sea ice, and increased areal extent of the North African monsoon. The Arctic remains warm throughout the year. These changes are greater in the lig127k than midHolocene simulation. Other notable changes are reduction of the Niño3.4 variability and Drake Passage transport and a small increase in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation from the piControl to midHolocene to lig127k simulation. Comparisons to paleoâdata and to simulations from previous model versions are discussed. Possible reasons for mismatches with the paleoâobservations are proposed, including missing processes in CESM2, simplifications in the CMIP6 protocols for these experiments, and dating and calibration uncertainties in the data reconstructions